Geter/Kicking/Fundraising

[hammb]

We need to get back to the style we had with J5 at the helm, not Omar. The style of football we played with Jacobs was not conducive to winning long term. Too many passes, refusing to run the ball even when running out the clock would've iced games.

Throwing the ball 80 times a game is absurd.

It's called balance, and it's what should be strived for. Last year we were too heavily run because our passing game was inept. Under Omar we threw too much, I think because we fell in love with the quick scores (forcing our defense back onto the field too quickly).

The best way to win football games is a potent, balanced attack.

[Flipper]

80 times a game? hammb...I think some of those were "instant replays"...not actual live game action.

I prefer to win games by scoring more than the opponents, but I thinkyou tend to be a bit more traditional than I am...

[1987alum]

We need to get back to the style we had with J5 at the helm, not Omar. The style of football we played with Jacobs was not conducive to winning long term. Too many passes, refusing to run the ball even when running out the clock would've iced games.

Throwing the ball 80 times a game is absurd.

It's called balance, and it's what should be strived for. Last year we were too heavily run because our passing game was inept. Under Omar we threw too much, I think because we fell in love with the quick scores (forcing our defense back onto the field too quickly).

The best way to win football games is a potent, balanced attack.

Absolutely. I love seeing BG teams throw the ball, but we have been most successful when we were able to pile up rushing yards. With the way our defense looks - aggressive and fast, I don't like the idea of them being shuttled off and on the field after a series of three incomplete passes by our offense.

J5 had great passing numbers, but they were complimented by good rushing stats from him and his teammates.

[falconfan1999]

We need to get back to the style we had with J5 at the helm, not Omar. The style of football we played with Jacobs was not conducive to winning long term. Too many passes, refusing to run the ball even when running out the clock would've iced games.

Throwing the ball 80 times a game is absurd.

It's called balance, and it's what should be strived for. Last year we were too heavily run because our passing game was inept. Under Omar we threw too much, I think because we fell in love with the quick scores (forcing our defense back onto the field too quickly).

The best way to win football games is a potent, balanced attack.

Absolutely. I love seeing BG teams throw the ball, but we have been most successful when we were able to pile up rushing yards. With the way our defense looks - aggressive and fast, I don't like the idea of them being shuttled off and on the field after a series of three incomplete passes by our offense.

J5 had great passing numbers, but they were complimented by good rushing stats from him and his teammates.

True dat! What seperated J5 from Omar was his ability to run and AVOID the big hit. He was also tough enough that he could put his head down when needed, but was SMART enough to avoid contact when it wasn't necessary. It also helped to have weapons surrounding him like Cole Magner, Steve Sanders,Charles Sharon, B.J.Lane and P.J. Pope, just to name a few! And they were all healthy J5's senior year!

[hammb]

80 times a game? hammb...I think some of those were "instant replays"...not actual live game action.

I prefer to win games by scoring more than the opponents, but I thinkyou tend to be a bit more traditional than I am...

Just commenting on the quote from Sville, Flip:

in the article GB is quoted saying that he would throw 80 times if he could. Hopefully that is a sign that we are getting back to the style we ran with Omar at the helm.

Last year we had no choice but to be one dimensional and we saw what it got us. During the '04 season we were one dimensional by choice, and it cost us. Most notably the UT game which we pissed away because we refused to run the clock in the 2nd half, instead trying to throw, and failing.

The key to good football is balance. This is what Urban Meyer preached, and it's what built the offense to what it became in the '03 season. Having balance makes both passing & running easier by keeping the defense guessing. I'm pretty sure I don't have to explain this to you, Flip. I just don't like the sounds of trying to throw the ball 80 times.

That said, I'm pretty sure this is just some hyperbole coming from coach. He was probably asked something like, "Are you going to throw the ball more this year?" To which he replied, "I'd throw 80 times if we could." To me it looks similar to the kicking situation. He's trying to say our passing game has improved this year so we can rely on it more.

[moneymaker02]

just thought i'd let everyone know that collegefootballnews picked minn to win 34-14.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

just thought i'd let everyone know that collegefootballnews picked minn to win 34-14.

In that case, pop the cork on the bubbly -- we're 1-0!!!

[Flipper]

I think we're overstating the shift in the offense from 2002-2004. Looking at the year end numbers on the official site we see that:

2002.... we ran 42 times a game on avg and gained 219 yds. We threw 33 times a game and gained right around 230 ypg.

2003...we ran 41 times oer game and gained an average of 196 yds. we passed 37 times a game and gained 300 ypg.

2004 we ran 36 times a game and gained 168 ypg and passed 39 times for 338 ypg.

So...while the attempts stayed fairly well balanced from Meyer's last year through Brandon's second, we got a lot better at throwing and a bit worse at running. The attack was still reasonably balanced bu the results skewed towards passing....somewhat. The yards per carry fell off from 5.3 in 2002 to 4.7 in 03 and 04 and we averaged about 50 fewer rushing yards less in 04 than 02, we gained 100 yards in 04 over 02 throwing the ball. When all is sadi and done I will gladly take 50 yards of total offense more a game.

[MarkL]

We really need that big running game in order for passing a ton to work. Omar was an incredible passer and had quite a few great receivers in 2004, but the real reason the passing game was so effective that year was because defenses were always concerned that P.J. Pope could shred through their defenses if they stacked up against the receivers. This year, assuming Brandon's comments about passing a ton were joking or sarcastic, I think we may see some of the same types of offense. With Geter proving to be straight up amazing and having a lot of depth behind him, the passing game should be quite effective if defenses are scared of the running game.

[hammb]

When all is sadi and done I will gladly take 50 yards of total offense more a game.

See, I disagree. I would much rather have the higher yards per carry & more evenly balanced attack. MOST great football coaches strive for perfect balance, not the most yards. The most yards looks pretty, but in the end scoring points & keeping your defense off the field are the most important things for your offense. As a general rule the ability to run in the redzone is more conducive to scoring (not that the '04 team had any problems scoring). The ability to run the ball is also wonderful for milking leads in the 2nd half and not allowing your defense a shot at blowing the game.

The '04 UT game, for instance. Had we had an additional .6 yards per carry and switched those 6 passes to 6 runs (indicative of our '02 numbers) I think we win that game. We came out trying to throw in the 2nd half, missed some throws, and immediately we let UT right back in a game that should've been a blowout.

More importantly, I think what I notice from those numbers is not that the playcalling became less balanced (in fact it became more balanced), but rather that our production became less balanced. As our passing game improved our ability to run the game got worse. That shouldn't be, and it's not good.

[Rightupinthere]

But when told that Zaccheo called him "a monster in the weight room," Geter laughed and said Zaccheo's assessment is accurate.

"Yeah, that's surprising but it's true," Geter said. "I've been put down plenty of times about my size. It makes me work hard. I dig deep and play tough no matter how big they are."

A former teammate of Geter's found that out the hard way during a practice two years ago.

"I had a starting free safety about 6 foot, 185 pounds," Zaccheo said. "Willie ran an inside power play and cut it outside. Then the free safety came up to make the play and he thought he was going to bulldog Willie. Willie cut up into him and dislocated his collar bone, or broke it, or dislocated his shoulder. All I know is I lost my free safety for six weeks."

Oooooooh. Sounds like I'm really going to like this kid. He may be another surprise player like Dozier was/is.

[Flipper]

I think you're still making mountains out of molehills. Over four qtrs six attempts one way or the other is neglible...that breaks down to less than 2 attempts either way a qtr. That's next to nothing in terms of the clock.

In thory we might win at UT if we ran a ton more...in thoery, if we threw the ball better (throw and catch actually) against NIU in 2002, we would have won. Personally...I think the debate boils down to doing what you think your team is prepared for and able to do vs changing tactics to meet ths circumstances even if it doesn't suit your view of the game.

We lost at NIU in 02 and UT in 2004 because we didn't execute on both side of the ball for 60 minutes. Not being able to stop the run at all made a MUCH larger difference in both games than the play mix on offense.

Over the course of time ,we didn't get THAT much worse at running the ball...we're talking about a half a yard per carry differential...again, that just isn't that big of a deal. We were a very good running team and we stayed a good running team. We were a good passing offense that became a great passing offense.

but then...i'm not one of those dyed in the wool midwesterners that doesn't think you're playing football if you aren't doing all that three yards and a cloud of dust stuff every game. I want my offense to move the ball and I want my defense to stop the other guys from scoring. I don't really care how we get there.

[moneymaker02]

I'll believe the hype about Geter when the season starts. At this time last year Brandon was praising that Zach Charles was the new Sharon. Granted Charles did look decent, I would never have gone to say that he is a freak like Sharon as Brandon did.

[hammb]

I'm not advocating 3 yards & a cloud of dust, I just like balance. My personal preference is to attempt to recreate that 2003 offense versus the 2004 model. I think over the course of a season those 6 extra carries make a bigger difference than you realize. Especially when you're trying to keep a defense rested.



In the end I think the whole thing is mostly irrelevant. You can win games with either '03 or '04 offense. The real problem is the '06 offense, and how far away from that we can get. In my usual pessimistic view I'll figure we'll be a lot closer to '06 than either '03 or '04 this year, but we'll see. If the STs don't drastically improve it really won't matter anyways.

[Rollo83]

I get the balance offense thing, but watching Omar and the passing game was owesome. That offense leveled the playing field for us against the better teams.

It allowed us to go into Oklahoma and be competitive with one of the better teams in the country. It allowed us to go into Wisconsin and smack them in the mouth for 40-plus points. It allowed us to hang 56 points on Memphis State. Remember that first half against Toledo where we dominated? I know, I know the second half was a different story, but that offense gave us a swagger. Nobody wanted to play against that offense.

Yes, that offense scored so quick it put your defense on the field a lot. But with any defense at all and we would have won the MAC championship with those offensive teams.